[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
▼ Settings Mobile Home
/sci/ - Science & Math


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.


[Advertise on 4chan]


A new investigative report just published in The BMJ revealed that US health agencies _knowingly_ relied on a mathematically flawed surveillance AI algorithm to monitor post-market safety signals for modRNA/LNP COVID-19 vaccines in the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). Based on internal emails, FOIA documents, and interviews, the investigation details how top officials were aware of the technical failure, ignored internal warnings, and suppressed efforts by career scientists to fix the issue.

https://www.bmj.com/content/394/bmj-2026-100806

Normally, automated safety algorithms require a minimum threshold - typically 3 to 5 cases - showing a statistically higher rate than expected. In case of COVID vaccines, they failed to work after 1.1 mln cases, including 27.000 sudden deaths happening right after vaccination.

Over 90% of initial VAERS reports were for the two modRNA vaccines (Pfizer and Moderna). Because the FDAs empirical Bayesian algorithm calculated expected risk by comparing reports against the whole dataset, two vaccines causing the same avalanche of side effects at similar rates cancelled each other out, preventing the algorithm from triggering safety alerts.

In early 2021, senior FDA medical officer Dr. Ana Szarfman and statistician William DuMouchel (the algorithms original creator) alerted officials to the flaw and developed a fix. Rather than updating the system, FDA management ordered Dr. Szarfman to "cease and desist".

VAERS contains over 1.1 million COVID-19 vaccine adverse event reports, including over 200.000 SAEs (life-threatening conditions and deaths) reported up to few weeks after vaccination. Because modRNA vaccines made up over 90% of all VAERS reports, high event frequencies - including deaths - artificially inflated that baseline. Comparing modRNA shots against a background dominated by themselves masked disproportionality, preventing automated alerts from triggering.
>>
An AHRQ-funded study by Harvard researchers analyzed electronic medical records from 715,000 patients and found that fewer than 1% of vaccine adverse events are voluntarily reported to VAERS. The authors attributed this underreporting to passive system limitations, clinician time constraints, and lack of automated tracking.

https://digital.ahrq.gov/ahrq-funded-projects/electronic-support-public-health-vaccine-adverse-event-reporting-system

Applying the <1% reporting rate from the AHRQ/Harvard study (Lazarus et al.) translates to an underreporting factor of at least 100x (1 / 0.01).

Extrapolating this 100x multiplier directly to the 1.1 million COVID-19 VAERS reports yields the following estimated totals:

Total Adverse Events : 110 mln
Serious Adverse Events: 20 mln
Deaths: 2.7 mln

Thats a realistic damage these gene therapies did to the US-American population _shortly_ after "vaccination". All these numbers exclude long term disorders, disabilities and deaths that happen all the time due to permanent genomic/transcriptomic/proteomic instability that is most probably inherited.
>>
>>17058193
>relied on a mathematically flawed surveillance AI algorithm

Technically, it was MGPS algorithm. In pharmacovigilance, MGPS is classified as a disproportionality data-mining tool, distinct from machine-learning AI models. Calling it AI is a misnomer. My mistake.

t. OP
>>
2 more weeks until total vaxcattle death or something
>>
Stay on your own board
>>>/pol/543007690
>>
>>17058314
BMJ is kosher though. Peer reviewed, "prestigious" and stuff. If exactly the same report was published on Zenodo, it would be instantly defined as "incredible" by paid shills.

>A new study found that the most prominent medical journals primarily use peer reviewers who have received, in total, over $1 billion dollars from the pharmaceutical/device industry in just three years.

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2824834
>>
>>17058326
Your study was also published on /pol/ so it's not credible anymore. Go back to your unscientific board. This is a board for discussing real science, like how to flatten the curve.
>>
>>17058193
>VAERS contains over 1.1 million COVID-19 vaccine adverse event reports, including over 200.000 SAEs (life-threatening conditions and deaths) reported up to few weeks after vaccination.

Which by the way supercedes all reported side-effects for all vaccines ever.

And it is not a vaccine, it's s genetic engineering platform
>>
>>17058193
All vaccines are weapons of genocide



[Advertise on 4chan]

Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.